[tahoe-dev] [tahoe-lafs] #964: List sizes for storage using base-2 sizes, not base-10

[tahoe-lafs]

#964: List sizes for storage using base-2 sizes, not base-10
--------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  USSJoin       |           Owner:           
     Type:  defect        |          Status:  new      
 Priority:  minor         |       Milestone:  undecided
Component:  code-storage  |         Version:  1.6.0    
 Keywords:  usability     |   Launchpad_bug:           
--------------------------+-------------------------------------------------
Changes (by davidsarah):

  * keywords:  => usability


Comment:

 We're with USSJoin on this. Resist the hard disk manufacturers'
 conspiracy.

 Replying to [comment:4 zooko]:
 > We generally prefer base-10 arithmetic, because it is easier for users
 to use. For example, if you ask my mom how many 20-byte things she can
 store in a 2-terabyte bucket, she'll probably ask "What's a terabyte?",
 and if you tell her it is a trillion bytes, she'll say "Then I can store
 100 billion of them."

 This is not a convincing argument, since you're more likely to need to
 know how many 1 MiB files, say, can be stored in a terabyte. (BTW, your
 mom's estimate would be wildly wrong for 20-byte files due to overhead.)

 What mattered was that there was a consistent convention. Since most uses
 of "GB" (for example) still mean 2^30 bytes, Tahoe is going in the wrong
 direction to reduce confusion.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://allmydata.org/trac/tahoe/ticket/964#comment:5>
tahoe-lafs <http://allmydata.org>
secure decentralized file storage grid